Welcome to FinHeaven Fans Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd
like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our
other members.

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

If you are a member in good standing, then you can navigate to the 2015 Miami Dolphins Media Guide from the navigation bar at the top of the forums. Also, in the sticky section of the main forum, there is a link to vote on your top 50 dolphins players of all time.

If the Colts had "tried" on defense (with the same players they used to defeat us last weekend mind you) and got even a Brady Quinn caliber QB who was readily available through FA...They easily win 7-9 games last season. They lost several by 3 with Curtis Painter...Who is Curtis Painter?

The could haave easily won a few more games if they let Kerry Collins play QB or went with Dan Orlovsky at QB. It was a concious decision by the owner/coach to keep Curtis Painter the starting QB in order to lose more games imo.

We all know Painter was garbage but their defense never showed up in any game. I watched some of their games and it was so obvious that it was laughable. Their defense on sunday looked nothing like that defense from last year. If we had played the colts last year with our offense now we would have scored 40. They tanked it on purpose. I know a lot of people would say never happen but their owner is a s**mbag and I wouldnt trust him as far as I can throw him.

The same Colts defense that allowed Miami to lead most of the day? The Colts D wasn't the reason they won the game, it was Miami's lack of 1) rushing the football or line play in general and 2) Miami's inability to stop ridiculous 3rd and long conversions.

This loss has more to do with what Miami didn't do than what the Colts did do.

The same Colts defense that allowed Miami to lead most of the day? The Colts D wasn't the reason they won the game, it was Miami's lack of 1) rushing the football or line play in general and 2) Miami's inability to stop ridiculous 3rd and long conversions.

This loss has more to do with what Miami didn't do than what the Colts did do.

I agree but do you think the colts defensively are playing the same as they did last year? Not even close. Last year the defense didnt care how obvious it looked, they were tanking. what about the fumbles by Clark? the laterals that went into the opposing teams hands? Just too much stuff stood out last year.

I find this thread hilarious. Who really give a s**t if they sucked for luck. They got him fair and square and thats the reality of it. There were MANY MANY people on this board wanted us to tank the season for the rights to draft Luck, myself included.

I believe any man's finest hour - his greatest fulfillment to all he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle...Victorious

A QB makes a WORLD OF DIFFERENCE and the Colts lost one of the greatest QBs to ever play the game of football and proceed to go 2-14 as a result.

Then, they draft the first legitimate franchise QB since John Elway in 1983, he immediately makes a WORLD OF DIFFERENCE and you say the Colts tanked.

You can't have it both ways here. Which is it?

They did tank, but not in the way most people are thinking.

The only players you are going to get to fall in line with an order to tank would possibly be established vets who have a contract in place or a nod from the organization that their play in the season in question will not effect their pay on their next contract. Basically, its almost nobody. Maybe Freeney.

Players are out there trying to earn a living. Their play is on film. They are going to try their best. They cant just trust an organization to take care of them. Also, they put themselves at risk for injury if they arent playing the game right. So the idea that it was a team wide conspiracy to tank is total bull****. HOWEVER............

There was definately a plan within the organization to tank that season once Peyton Manning was injured and couldnt start the season. Here are the steps........

1) Peyton Manning was not allowed to take the field. There is no doubt in my mind Peyton could have played towards the end of last season, probably even the entire 2nd half or more. Over playing his injury and the team convincing him that he would be putting himself at risk was part of the plan to suck for Luck. If Manning plays, they win games.

2) Playing a completely inept QB over a guy who was somewhat capable of getting something done. These 2 were the real key. Curtis Painter had no business in an NFL uniform, much less starting games. Everyone knew this. The guy they had on the bench(Orlovski of whatever his name was) was much more capable of winning. Thats why he didnt get in the game. That guy was a legit backup NFL QB, so he sat while they rolled out Painter.

3) Keeping a total bewb in there to manage the games. Jim Caldwell was completely clueless. This was known for years, but when they had Manning in there, everyone knew Manning managed the games so the HC wasnt much of a factor. Once Manning went down, Caldwell was in charge.

QB play is so important, that those simple steps alone were a recipe to lose almost every game on a roster that wasnt exactly great. True, if they had a good QB they are a winning team, but Painter was so bad their offense had no shot.

Now, whether or not a couple of vets were in on the plan is debateable. I kind of doubt it. The one thing they can do is not play certain guys. If a player were in on it, he could simply not play due to "injury" and get himself a season of rest. There are very few players who would be willing to do this and it would take a special circumstance.

The one thing you could go back and check is if they shed some of their veteran players off the roster. I think they did.

If you take those steps above, its a recipe for sucking for Luck. Its never a guarantee, but it give you a great shot.

Having said all of that, take a look at what the Panthers did the previous season. I called that one from the start of the season. There is no question in my mind they sucked for Luck. Problem is, their plan back fired on them as Luck did not come out. I know they didnt suck for Newton. Right now they suck with Newton.

But, look at what the Panthers did before that season. They completely stripped their roster of key veteran players by cutting most of them and trading the ones that could get them anything back. They rolled out a completely lame duck HC who none of the players would respect because they all knew he was getting fired at seasons end. It was an organizational plan to tank the season. They set it up to where they knew no matter how hard the players played, they werent going to win. Simple as that.

Now, could the phins have sucked for Luck last year? You bet your ass they couldve made a solid run at it if they tried. However, they obviously didnt. They definately had the pieces in place to give it a run though.

1) They couldve left Sparano at HC. I seriously thought this mightve been the plan when they brought him back. Sparano was clueless. He could definately botch games while trying to win. Despite the extention, everyone on the team knew he was on his way out and it was a big factor in them losing early in the year. I think its obvious from some of the statements from players coming out that the players did not respect him.

But, if they really wanted to suck for Luck, they should not have extended him. They shouldve just let him coach while on that last year of the contract and make it totally obvious he was a lame duck. This wouldve been bad for the team, which of course means good if you get Luck out of it.

2) They shouldve kept Henne in at QB. Henne was terrible. Now, he wasnt quite as bad as Painter, but he was certainly capable of losing every game. He was not good thats for sure. He was good at keeping our offense out of the endzone.

3) They shouldve never signed Matt Moore. A capable backup was the last nail in the coffin for not getting Luck. The last thing you ever want to do is play a QB who is capable of winning games. Firing Sparano and playing Moore gave us no shot to suck for Luck. We were going to win games with Sparano and Henne out of the way. Had we rolled into the season with a terrible backup, we couldve justified playing him over Henne at any point and being even worse. Henne/Devlin wouldve been a recipe for success....... sucking for Luck.

4) Just keeping Sparano and rolling with Henne/Devlin wouldve likely gotten the job done or at least given us an outstanding shot at 1-15 or 0-16. But, this last step was something the phins couldve definately done.............

We needed to do what Carolina did and strip our roster of good veteran players who could make plays. If we had done this, there is no question we couldve gotten Luck. Instead we added guys like Reggie Bush who could make plays.

All the pieces were in place for us to do it, but I will tell you why we didnt. Because Ireland wouldve never survived a horrible season like that. For him to come full circle from the 1-15 disaster he took over wouldve been the end of him. The only way we couldve done it wouldve been for the plan to come straight from Ross. Ross wouldve had to instruct Ireland to put the plan in place to suck for Luck and ASSURE him that despite the **** storm that wouldve been coming from the fans and media for his job in the offseason, that he wouldve kept his job as GM.

I suppose Ireland couldve gone to Ross with a suck for Luck plan, but if he does that he cant be assured that Ross wouldnt back stab him and fire him at seasons end. The order had to come from Ross. Im sure Ireland may have thought about it and wanted to do it, but there is no way he can take that idea to his boss. His boss had to come to him with it. I just dont see Ross being that football smart to think of it.

After all of this, what is so stupid is that we had already gone 1-15 once and been in place to take an elite QB with pick #1. We inadvertantly sucked for Matty Ice and Parcells' dumbass was too stupid to take him.

WV - i gotta say, your above post^ is pretty convincing as to what the Colts did--particularly points 2 and 3. And you account for the fact that the players didn't have to know; they were simply in a position to lose without even trying to tank. Surprisingly compelling.

Re: Colts tanked in 2011 - revisited

Originally Posted by WVDolphan

They did tank, but not in the way most people are thinking.

The only players you are going to get to fall in line with an order to tank would possibly be established vets who have a contract in place or a nod from the organization that their play in the season in question will not effect their pay on their next contract. Basically, its almost nobody. Maybe Freeney.

Players are out there trying to earn a living. Their play is on film. They are going to try their best. They cant just trust an organization to take care of them. Also, they put themselves at risk for injury if they arent playing the game right. So the idea that it was a team wide conspiracy to tank is total bull****. HOWEVER............

There was definately a plan within the organization to tank that season once Peyton Manning was injured and couldnt start the season. Here are the steps........

1) Peyton Manning was not allowed to take the field. There is no doubt in my mind Peyton could have played towards the end of last season, probably even the entire 2nd half or more. Over playing his injury and the team convincing him that he would be putting himself at risk was part of the plan to suck for Luck. If Manning plays, they win games.

2) Playing a completely inept QB over a guy who was somewhat capable of getting something done. These 2 were the real key. Curtis Painter had no business in an NFL uniform, much less starting games. Everyone knew this. The guy they had on the bench(Orlovski of whatever his name was) was much more capable of winning. Thats why he didnt get in the game. That guy was a legit backup NFL QB, so he sat while they rolled out Painter.

3) Keeping a total bewb in there to manage the games. Jim Caldwell was completely clueless. This was known for years, but when they had Manning in there, everyone knew Manning managed the games so the HC wasnt much of a factor. Once Manning went down, Caldwell was in charge.

QB play is so important, that those simple steps alone were a recipe to lose almost every game on a roster that wasnt exactly great. True, if they had a good QB they are a winning team, but Painter was so bad their offense had no shot.

Now, whether or not a couple of vets were in on the plan is debateable. I kind of doubt it. The one thing they can do is not play certain guys. If a player were in on it, he could simply not play due to "injury" and get himself a season of rest. There are very few players who would be willing to do this and it would take a special circumstance.

The one thing you could go back and check is if they shed some of their veteran players off the roster. I think they did.

If you take those steps above, its a recipe for sucking for Luck. Its never a guarantee, but it give you a great shot.

Having said all of that, take a look at what the Panthers did the previous season. I called that one from the start of the season. There is no question in my mind they sucked for Luck. Problem is, their plan back fired on them as Luck did not come out. I know they didnt suck for Newton. Right now they suck with Newton.

But, look at what the Panthers did before that season. They completely stripped their roster of key veteran players by cutting most of them and trading the ones that could get them anything back. They rolled out a completely lame duck HC who none of the players would respect because they all knew he was getting fired at seasons end. It was an organizational plan to tank the season. They set it up to where they knew no matter how hard the players played, they werent going to win. Simple as that.

Now, could the phins have sucked for Luck last year? You bet your ass they couldve made a solid run at it if they tried. However, they obviously didnt. They definately had the pieces in place to give it a run though.

1) They couldve left Sparano at HC. I seriously thought this mightve been the plan when they brought him back. Sparano was clueless. He could definately botch games while trying to win. Despite the extention, everyone on the team knew he was on his way out and it was a big factor in them losing early in the year. I think its obvious from some of the statements from players coming out that the players did not respect him.

But, if they really wanted to suck for Luck, they should not have extended him. They shouldve just let him coach while on that last year of the contract and make it totally obvious he was a lame duck. This wouldve been bad for the team, which of course means good if you get Luck out of it.

2) They shouldve kept Henne in at QB. Henne was terrible. Now, he wasnt quite as bad as Painter, but he was certainly capable of losing every game. He was not good thats for sure. He was good at keeping our offense out of the endzone.

3) They shouldve never signed Matt Moore. A capable backup was the last nail in the coffin for not getting Luck. The last thing you ever want to do is play a QB who is capable of winning games. Firing Sparano and playing Moore gave us no shot to suck for Luck. We were going to win games with Sparano and Henne out of the way. Had we rolled into the season with a terrible backup, we couldve justified playing him over Henne at any point and being even worse. Henne/Devlin wouldve been a recipe for success....... sucking for Luck.

4) Just keeping Sparano and rolling with Henne/Devlin wouldve likely gotten the job done or at least given us an outstanding shot at 1-15 or 0-16. But, this last step was something the phins couldve definately done.............

We needed to do what Carolina did and strip our roster of good veteran players who could make plays. If we had done this, there is no question we couldve gotten Luck. Instead we added guys like Reggie Bush who could make plays.

All the pieces were in place for us to do it, but I will tell you why we didnt. Because Ireland wouldve never survived a horrible season like that. For him to come full circle from the 1-15 disaster he took over wouldve been the end of him. The only way we couldve done it wouldve been for the plan to come straight from Ross. Ross wouldve had to instruct Ireland to put the plan in place to suck for Luck and ASSURE him that despite the **** storm that wouldve been coming from the fans and media for his job in the offseason, that he wouldve kept his job as GM.

I suppose Ireland couldve gone to Ross with a suck for Luck plan, but if he does that he cant be assured that Ross wouldnt back stab him and fire him at seasons end. The order had to come from Ross. Im sure Ireland may have thought about it and wanted to do it, but there is no way he can take that idea to his boss. His boss had to come to him with it. I just dont see Ross being that football smart to think of it.

After all of this, what is so stupid is that we had already gone 1-15 once and been in place to take an elite QB with pick #1. We inadvertantly sucked for Matty Ice and Parcells' dumbass was too stupid to take him.

Good post but John Fox is better than a lame duck like Caldwell or Sparano. John Fox's problem was sticking with Jake Delhomme after his 2008 NFC championship meltdown. But it's hard to ditch a QB who has played in the Superbowl and a NFC title game or 2 for you.

I find this thread hilarious. Who really give a s**t if they sucked for luck. They got him fair and square and thats the reality of it. There were MANY MANY people on this board wanted us to tank the season for the rights to draft Luck, myself included.

And for you I have a nice piece of ocean front property located on AZ....Dont be so gullible Mcfly...There are crooked people who will cheat you in this world *Shocker* and some of their clueless victims never even know they have been had but accepted it like it was just their fate. No...Your fate may have been different had you not been shafted.